Lord save us from the nannies

Jacob Sullum at Reason brings us the following. It just never ceases to amaze me (although given the proliferation of such legislation I suppose it should) what some people think the purpose of a legislature is:

The Food and Drug Administration can ban caffeinated alcoholic beverages such as Four Loko, but it cannot stop bartenders from mixing Red Bull with vodka, coffee with Irish whiskey, or cola with rum. Fortunately, Iowa state Sen. Brian Schoenjahn (D-Arlington) has proposed a bill that would close this dangerous gap by making it a misdemeanor for any business with a liquor license to "manufacture for sale, sell, offer or keep for sale, import, distribute, transport, or possess any caffeinated alcoholic beverage." The bill defines "caffeinated alcoholic beverage" as "any beverage containing more than one-half of one percent of alcohol by volume, including alcoholic liquor, wine, and beer, to which caffeine is added." Hence it apparently applies not only to drinks with a noticeable caffeine kick but also to coffee-flavored liqueurs with detectable amounts of the stimulant, such as Kahlua or Tia Maria, and any cocktails made with them, such as a Black Russian or a Mudslide. In addition to jail time and fines, violators would face revocation (not just suspension) of their liquor licenses, and therefore loss of their livelihoods—a pretty harsh penalty for following the instructions in a Mr. Boston book.

Another in a long line of those who would tell you what to eat, who you can love, what is “best” for you and remove all choices they find incompatible with their vision of how your life should be lived. And they’re willing to put you in jail if you don’t agree.

In 1:20 I will brew a pot of French Market coffee with chicory, pour myself a mug and add 2 oz of Black Bush (I swear that’s the name) Irish Whiskey. After adding whipped cream topping, I will add a stick of cinnamon, stir and drink it. What are you Progressive wimps going to do about it?

This is not a problem with nannies. This is a problem with legislators. Just like rookie managers think they have to manage, legislators seem to think they need to legislate even when they cannot define the problem. Schoenjahn needs a smack on the back of his head and an invitation to resign for stupidity.

It makes you wonder if these politicians are thinking “I’ll gladly give up my [insert caffeine/alcohol beverage here] if it means I’ll make it that much harder for a college kid to get drunk.” I have to believe that either (a) they don’t drink so it makes no difference to them; (b) they have no clue what’s in their favorite alcoholic beverages which they enjoy purchasing at bars; (c) they think they’ll still be able to get their favorite caffeinated alcoholic beverage when the rest of us proles can’t; or (d) they’re getting high on something (whiteboard markers?) while writing this dreck legislation.

My experience pushes me towards (b), with maybe a bit of (c) thrown in for good measure.

This may be in poor taste, but have those fools learned nothing from the events of the past week? We right-wing-ultra-radical-wingnut-conservative-zealots may be jest a wee bit touchy about our favourite potables.

If you think you are having a stroke, you might want to drink an Irish coffee while you are waiting for the ambulance to show up. Some sources actually recommend that you keep coffee and whiskey in your first aid kits at home and in your car so you can improve your chances of surviving a stroke and limiting the damage it can cause.

Physicians have been studying the benefits of administering a caffeine/alcohol cocktail to their stroke patients. “Early research suggests that the combination of caffeine and alcohol can considerably reduce stroke damage. One ounce of whiskey in a cup of strong, black (not decaffeinated) coffee — the thicker the better — qualify. Alcohol opens up blood vessels and caffeine is known to increase blood flow. Should it turn out to be a false alarm, an occasional Irish coffee (if you are not allergic) offers a pretty small risk.”

The problem with legislation that is really nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to a perceived problem is that it so often wields a broad weapon that eliminates a lot of good along with the poorly understood bad. Thus the drive to restrict salt consumption and carbon dioxide, both of which are in fact essential for life. They’re trying to solve a non-problem, using an emotional response instead of actual scientific evidence, and in so doing are also eliminating a great many benefits that they apparently know nothing about. And that’s the hallmark of the leftist: if they don’t know something from their own personal experience, it doesn’t exist and therefore no serious study before proposing a new law is ever needed. They’re like children who once got a cut from a piece of glass, so now they want to take a sledgehammer and destroy all glass everywhere so it can never hurt anyone again.

Last week’s ruling by the private radio regulator Canadian Broadcast Standards Council (CBSC) to ban a Dire Straits song is “chilling” and effectively puts rock radio stations on notice, claims a longtime music industry expert. Former Billboard Canadian bureau chief and current CelebrityAccess senior editor Larry LeBlanc says the fallout from banning Canadian private radio stations from airing the unedited version of the 1985 hit “Money For Nothing” — specifically for its repeated mention of the word “faggot” in a verse of the song — could resonate with music programmers for some time to come.

“If it please the court – the defendant was found with a 30 round clip for a semi-automatic pistol, and two Irish Coffees. The State was willing to overlook the clip, but the possession of the alcohol, caffeine beverage demonstrates the reckless attitude of the defendant, the State is asking for bail to be set at half a million dollars”

One of the biggest problems our, and any democratically elected government, has, is its own chosen legislature. (Same problem with “all the rest” cept there them isnt chosen – it is bludgeoned.) Namely, that those that run, and those that win, and especially those that continually win election, tend to have an over-inflated sense of self-importance. While they may be modest, I just know that swimming underneath that placid veneer is the knowledge that they are the ones to really make a difference. Their brilliance, while questioned by many, is so apparent to themselves. “If only others would listen…” I’m sure is a constant echo in their minds. It is not that this is what every sentient human thinks. No, the difference is that us commoners have to deal with a real world that insists we prove our worth daily, responsibility, and with consequence.

Politicians? Are you kidding me? No, they have developed the wonderful (for them) mechanism of shirking off responsibility to federal agencies that have to wallow through mind-numbing legislation that they themselves pass so that they then have someone else to blame when things go wrong (or aren’t perfect). Because of their over-inflated, and rarely quizzed brilliance, they are afforded all means, some reasonable, some questionable, some illegal, to make sure that they can remain in their positions of authority; more importantly, where they always have plausible deny-ability for their grand follies.